Talk:Motivation and emotion/Book/2023/Nudge theory and sedentary behaviour

Initial suggestions
Thanks for tackling this topic.

Some initial suggestions:


 * Check out other related chapters and see how you can build on, link to, and integrate with that work:
 * Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Motivation
 * Category:Motivation and emotion/Book/Physical exercise
 * What psychological theories can help to understand? What is the main research in this area?

Let me know if I can do anything else as you go along.

Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:01, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 07:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion for quiz
Hi there,

Great job on the chapter so far, just wanted to offer a suggestion about your quiz. From the book chapter guidelines it suggests that quizzes are more focused on application rather than trivia.

Feel free to ignore it, but maybe that would look something like this:

Justin did not realise that Valentine's Day is tomorrow, and rushes to the store to pick up some chocolates for his girlfriend Leah. However, once he gets there he realises he doesn't know what chocolates Leah likes, as they’ve only recently started dating. He sees a label stating they’re Australia’s best chocolate makers, and chooses that box. What is the most likely phenomenon or theory which explains Justin’s choice? (correct answer - bounded rationality)

Anyway, hopefully that’s helpful. Good luck with the rest of your chapter edits! U3213084 (discuss • contribs) 12:27, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Some comments, concerns and suggestions
I had skimmed the Wikipedia article on nudge theory some time ago and just now came across this resource. The examples are certainly not bad ones, but any method of modifying human behavior will be abused at some point, particularly methods that are less obvious or for which it's harder to prove intent. The article should include at least one example of this. I can think of at least a few likely examples. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

There's also the issue of common decency and respect to consider. One can certainly appreciate public health and cleanliness, and so these examples by themselves comprise a very sympathetic presentation of the idea. The article essentially presumes that people are fat, irrational and dirty, and suggests that mass psychological manipulation is therefore pro-social, the photo of a dingy urinal completing the picture as a rallying point for these pretensions. Or such is my impression, anyway. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I've got an example. Some time ago I was at a large train station. Much of the building's exterior had a concrete berm around the base which comprised its wall, with windows above. It was about four feet thick and three feet tall. The top was bare concrete and you could lay on it and sit on it, but it was angled at roughly 15-20 degrees. It does not need such a steep angle to shed water, and it was protected from rain by the edge of the building's roof anyway. I believe it's an example of hostile architecture: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_architecture. Yet there were no spikes or other overt features, not even the odd contours of a camden bench: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camden_bench. One could lie down for ten or twenty minutes, after that it got uncomfortable. The one or two apparent homeless were sitting on the ground below it. While a generous observer might call it a coincidence of design, train stations very commonly feature hostile architecture. This is arguably not an abuse of nudge theory nor is it an example of something entirely "pro-social". I think the article should include at least a couple examples in this vein. It's interesting that most of the examples on wikipedia's article are rather more conspicuous, added after the fact rather than built into the architecture. For better or worse, "nudge theory" is manipulative and the resource should not indoctrinate readers with the idea that nudge theory is only ever applied for the benefit of all. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 11:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

A few other notes: The resource could perhaps be renamed to just "Nudge theory", as that seems much more the focus of the article than sedentary behavior per se. Thinking upon it more, a few of the issues I talk about in Policy and Standards for Critical Discourse could arguably be instances of "nudging", though one can't be certain of intent. Feel free to comment on this essay if you care to do so, I always appreciate feedback. In cases where the motive is not the public good but perhaps a smaller set of interests, it would actually be better if people were openly forced rather than manipulated into collectively making a decision that is not "pro-social". In the former case, at least the public would understand who is imposing upon them and why. In the latter they believe they themselves are responsible for what has been imposed upon them. This seems like a common pattern in propaganda and public relations, and many of my essays touch upon it. I also think the term "nudge" itself is a bit euphemistic and implies a rather more personal sort of gesture than what it means in this context, which is frankly much closer to "speciously manipulate en masse". If nothing else, I really think this resource should include something like the Camden bench as an example. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 14:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

You seem to be in charge of the project, so I suppose I should take it up with you. Please see above. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 00:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your interest. This resource has been primarily authored by an undergraduate student. I am the unit convener, reviewer, marker etc. As nudge theory in very broad, this resource is focused on using nudge theory to reduce sedentary behaviour. However, feel free to improve such as in ways you suggest, as long as the material is based on cited peer-reviewed psychological theory and/or research. Let me know if I can do anything else. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 00:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd like your opinion on whether hostile architecture is an example of nudge theory, particularly the examples I gave above about the subtly-inclined berm and the camden bench. The wikipedia article only includes a few rather brutal examples and aside from the camden bench I assume they're all retrofitted. The berm I described above is almost certainly an example, but not so overt. I suggested changing the title to just "Nudge theory" because the resource already covers more than just its application in discouraging sedentary behavior, and most other chapters titles in the book are similarly general. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 02:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It sounds to me like hostile architecture is definitely an example of nudge theory more broadly, but probably not specifically to the application of nudge theory to promoting healthy physical movement which is the focus of the current chapter. I've add a broader nudge theory topic for the 2024 chapters Motivation and emotion/Book/2024 and you could feel free to contribute some content there or discuss further. Does that help? Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, thank you, but then I don't quite understand how this book will be organized. Will all the chapters from each year be complied into a single book? If the book is a project for your students or advisees then I don't want to do the work preemptively and spoil the assignment, but if it's going to remain on wikiversity as a published resource then I do have more feedback and critical comments about other chapters. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 04:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * All past chapters are available for ongoing improvement: Motivation and emotion/Book, so feel free. Once a "satisfactory" chapter is developed by a student, the topic is not repeated in following years. If a chapter is unsatisfactory, it gets repeated until a satisfactory chapter is developed. However, satisfactory does not mean that chapters are perfect and most can still benefit from additional feedback and/or direct improvements. We don't get many general contributors, but they are welcome and encouraged, depending on interest and expertise. Note that all of this is conducted through the lens of psychological science, as it is part of an undergraduate psychology course. Sincerely, James -- Jtneill - Talk - c 05:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, my background is computer science but I have a strong interest in rhetoric and propaganda. Or rather, I think that any work or discourse is more valuable and sets a better example if it's dialectical and objective. AP295 (discuss • contribs) 05:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

-- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)